↓ Skip to main content

Genetic Biomarkers of Barrett’s Esophagus Susceptibility and Progression to Dysplasia and Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Overview of attention for article published in Digestive Diseases and Sciences, October 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
28 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
57 Mendeley
Title
Genetic Biomarkers of Barrett’s Esophagus Susceptibility and Progression to Dysplasia and Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
Published in
Digestive Diseases and Sciences, October 2015
DOI 10.1007/s10620-015-3884-5
Pubmed ID
Authors

John M. Findlay, Mark R. Middleton, Ian Tomlinson

Abstract

Barrett's esophagus (BE) is a common and important precursor lesion of esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC). A third of patients with BE are asymptomatic, and our ability to predict the risk of progression of metaplasia to dysplasia and EAC (and therefore guide management) is limited. There is an urgent need for clinically useful biomarkers of susceptibility to both BE and risk of subsequent progression. This study aims to systematically identify, review, and meta-analyze genetic biomarkers reported to predict both. A systematic review of the PubMed and EMBASE databases was performed in May 2014. Study and evidence quality were appraised using the revised American Society of Clinical Oncology guidelines, and modified Recommendations for Tumor Marker Scores. Meta-analysis was performed for all markers assessed by more than one study. A total of 251 full-text articles were reviewed; 52 were included. A total of 33 germline markers of susceptibility were identified (level of evidence II-III); 17 were included. Five somatic markers of progression were identified; meta-analysis demonstrated significant associations for chromosomal instability (level of evidence II). One somatic marker of progression/relapse following photodynamic therapy was identified. However, a number of failings of methodology and reporting were identified. This is the first systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate genetic biomarkers of BE susceptibility and risk of progression. While a number of limitations of study quality temper the utility of those markers identified, some-in particular, those identified by genome-wide association studies, and chromosomal instability for progression-appear plausible, although robust validation is required.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 57 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 57 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 10 18%
Researcher 9 16%
Other 6 11%
Lecturer 5 9%
Student > Bachelor 4 7%
Other 17 30%
Unknown 6 11%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 33 58%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 7 12%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 5 9%
Business, Management and Accounting 1 2%
Mathematics 1 2%
Other 4 7%
Unknown 6 11%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 25 October 2016.
All research outputs
#18,699,725
of 23,854,458 outputs
Outputs from Digestive Diseases and Sciences
#3,249
of 4,304 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#191,084
of 281,433 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Digestive Diseases and Sciences
#32
of 62 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,854,458 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 18th percentile – i.e., 18% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,304 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.8. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 281,433 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 27th percentile – i.e., 27% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 62 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 40th percentile – i.e., 40% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.